I find it very hard to follow your logic,it is the government that gives your tax money to religion,not me,it is the government that has stated that atheism is unlawfull,not me,and it is the government that insists on maitaining religion with your tax money,why dodn't you complain about religion getting your tax money to promote their madness?you seem very upset about the idea that atheism might get some tax payers money but religion gets millions and you don't have a problem with this????are you allso a closet believer here to pervert the course of atheism???

I find it hard to understand how so called intellectuals can rationalise that an insane person is more desireable than a sane one.That many of you in here feel that I'm the enemy by saying the government needs to get sane,and your the good guys by saying a little bit of insanity is better.My main purpose for attacking ignorance is to get the government to stop funding the madness,or to offer equal funding for atheism.I'm told we are all atheists in here,I challenge that and would say Bill and some others are closet believers who are spies here to pervert the course of atheism,If we are all atheists there would be no arguement.

Bill,

You write, "I personally would take a fundamentalist that stays out of my wallet over an atheists set on me funding their agenda."

Interesting. I, on the other hand, would take a leftist who stays out of my computer and out of my library records, if not out of my pocket, over the fundamentalist who would enforce "obscenity" laws but who pretends that he is not interested in picking my wallet to fund his agenda. Because I know, from the record of the last decade, that the fundamentalist has no compunction about intruding into my private life and picking my wallet too (the fact that the fundamentalist does it by debasing the currency instead of honest taxation is not a point in his favor.)

Rex,
It was slightly cute for a while, but I think the cat is far enough out of the bag for me to tell the color of its fur.
I can never grasp the motivation of the atheist left. With no after life to reward you, why all the sacrifice? Seems to me, Rex, that you are trying to save the world from one set of mystics so that it can be delivered to your brand of mysticism.
I don't mean this as a personal attack. Maybe you have the sense to recognize injustice on some level but have not yet recognized it on the levels you propose to enact.

I personally would take a fundamentalist that stays out of my wallet over an atheists set on me funding their agenda.

Bill

This current governments policy on atheism is that it is ,not educational,it is not for the publics good ,and it is unlawfull.If you doubt my word contact Joanna Davidson from the Crown Law Office and ask her why she turned down my application for charitable trust status,my trust was to be called,SAVE THE WORLD CLUB,If we are a secular society how come religion gets funded but atheism doesn't.?so you say protect the individuals right to free belief of whatever they want,so the fundementalists take over and you all wonder why.

Brian Tamaki described a terrorist event happening here in NZ and he went on to explain that his flock would be safe,I wrote a letter of complaint to Bill Ralston and the minister of braodcasting,the minister then sent my letter to Bill so he got two copies of my letter,Brians recently signed contract was terminated and he has not been back to brainwash the kids on tv two anymore.I claim that victory as mine and some of my letters to parliament have allso been acted on,so complain moan your arse of until you get a response,refuse to accept ignorance and point the finger at the stupidity of religion at every opurtunity

No one who believes in and completely understands the nature of individual rights would:

1) Demand the government give him money so that he can advance his beliefs
2) Think that atheism should be unlawful
3) Think that the government should support or advance any beliefs

The government of New Zealand isnt a particularly good example of proper government all around. Perhaps you should consider advancing the cause of liberty as opposed to stopping religion. Assuming the apoplexy can be reversed.

Crazy as it sounds, a religious person who supports individual rights is a far cry better (and can be a good ally) than an atheist who believes in communism. This is an important difference.

I don't want the government to force people to believe I want the government to be honest.We do have the knowledge to replace religion and the government is carrying on the idea that we havn't,we can proove that it is rubbish but the government still insists on creating the illusion that religion is in some way credible.I can forgive joe blogs but I can't accept the those suposed brainy people in parliament can;t see it for the bullshit that it is so we have a deception,knowingly deliberatly carrying on the lie.When you donate to your church and claim 60% back from us the tax payer who is then financing the madness, we are,you and I are giving money that Brian Tamaki gets to promote his madness and when I apply for charitable trust as an atheist I,m turned down saying atheism is UNLAWFULL,and if you think that is acceptable you need your head read .

Intellectual Apoplexy.

I can't really say anything else in response to your argument.

If you want to do what you're talking about go buy a gun... Walk into a church on sunday... threaten everyone in that church's life if they refuse to give up their religion/belief in god.

This is what you are advocating being done... if this is what you want be honest about and bear the risks youself.

---Landon

Inking is sexy.

http://www.angelfire.com/comics/wickedlakes

Rex, do you think it is morally justified for a government premised in individual rights to force atheism upon people?